OK. I'm fascinated by this situation. My wife just bough a pair or Nike running shoes for $179 (claims they are the only ones that fit her properly). At the same time I bought a pair of mid-to-upper range K2 inline skates. They have a fairly complex soft shoe enclosed with a hard plastic shell, a metal chassis & 8 wheels with bearings. They also cost $179. Somebody please explain that for me!

It's easy to see that the inline skates, with a fairly complicated list of components might cost $30 - $50 to manufacture. The running shoes? Hard to see - even with "higher-end" materials - how they could cost more than about $10.

Because people will pay that much for the shoes?

More to the point, congratulations on picking up the K2s. They make the most badass skates period. I've been aggressive skating for about 15 years and I'm always preaching the advantages of K2. I've still got a 10 year old pair of transfers that fit like a glove filled with pillows and kittens and everything is replaceable. Best skate ever made in my opinion.

Bingo! I've got to believe that that IS the reason. There's a whole load of hype surrounding running & a dedicated user base prepared to buy into the hype. Of course, it's not just running shoes, but a whole range of "trainers" intended for recreational use & just as fashion items that are absurdly over-priced, largely as a result of "branding".

What puzzles me, with regard to the inline skates is why they are (relatively) so cheap. Another example would be bikes. Yes, a high-end, exotic bike can cost thousands of dollars, but it's now possible to buy a decent street bike/cruiser for about the same price as a pair of running shoes - & bear in mind that that includes shipping & handling of a fairly bulky, heavy item from the point of manufacture to the retail location. Again, how can you possibly justify that?!

What puzzles me, with regard to the inline skates is why they are (relatively) so cheap. Another example would be bikes. Yes, a high-end, exotic bike can cost thousands of dollars, but it's now possible to buy a decent street bike/cruiser for about the same price as a pair of running shoes - & bear in mind that that includes shipping & handling of a fairly bulky, heavy item from the point of manufacture to the retail location. Again, how can you possibly justify that?!

I think inline skates are inexpensive because their time has come and gone. Demand must be pretty low compared to their heyday 20 years ago.

Trust me, if you're looking at a $120 bike then it's definitely not "decent." It's a mass-produced item from Taiwan that will not stay in tune, with poorly functioning components that will soon fail.

I think inline skates are inexpensive because their time has come and gone. Demand must be pretty low compared to their heyday 20 years ago.

If that's true, I'm not sure that it's relevant except to the extent that when inline skates were a highly trendy product, it would have been possible for manufacturers to bump up the price. Companies like K2 make other products. If they continue to make inline skates, it's because they can still make money doing it at the prices they currently charge.

Trust me, if you're looking at a $120 bike then it's definitely not "decent." It's a mass-produced item from Taiwan that will not stay in tune, with poorly functioning components that will soon fail.

I wouldn't say $120, but perhaps $200. Of course it's a "mass-produced" item! What do you think running shoes are - handcrafted by shoe fairies? The bike is unlikely to be produced in Taiwan nowadays. These inexpensive bikes work perfectly well for their intended purpose - I have a couple of cruisers that are still going strong after several years.

My assumption is that running shoes are vastly overpriced relative to their manufacturing costs. That should represent an opportunity for a company to step in & undercut the competition by a considerable margin.

If that's true, I'm not sure that it's relevant except to the extent that when inline skates were a highly trendy product, it would have been possible for manufacturers to bump up the price. Companies like K2 make other products. If they continue to make inline skates, it's because they can still make money doing it at the prices they currently charge.

I wouldn't say $120, but perhaps $200. Of course it's a "mass-produced" item! What do you think running shoes are - handcrafted by shoe fairies? The bike is unlikely to be produced in Taiwan nowadays. These inexpensive bikes work perfectly well for their intended purpose - I have a couple of cruisers that are still going strong after several years.

My assumption is that running shoes are vastly overpriced relative to their manufacturing costs. That should represent an opportunity for a company to step in & undercut the competition by a considerable margin.

Lol @ at comparing a $200 bike to the top-of-the-line running shoes. A decent bike will run you close to $1000. A good bike, more; a top-of-the-line bike, and you're looking at used car prices (or new cheap cars).

And yes, we buy over-engineered running shoes at insane prices, but so do you with your "high-end" cheapass Chinese skates that cost $25 to manufacture; the only difference is you buy into the hype advertised about your skates but think running shoes are just carbon rubber and nylon mesh because you don't know much about shoes.

Also, you can't just manufacture awesome running shoes and sell them for half the price of competitors and be the new king. That takes hundreds of thousands of dollars to millions of dollars in advertising to overtake Asics, NB, Nike, et al. Where does all that money come from? Shoe sales.

What gets me is that there are shoes for every possible situation and that we are told we must have the "right" ones, each pair costing crazy money. Woe betide us if not. when I was running years ago I went to a specialist running shop and had a pair of Brooks something-or-others chosen for me. All I could remember about them was that I only wore them for running and I didn't particularly like the look of them; as soon as I stopped running I got rid of them. This time round, living no-where near a specialist shop (buying them online before trying them first is far from ideal) and being 10x more cynical than before, I've gone down the barefoot/minimalist route. So now, instead of wearing my walking boots when hiking, my trainers when walking the dog, my normal shoes when shopping, and super-engineered running shoes, I wear my VFFs for everything. Of course, shoe manufacturers don't want that as it means we spend less money buying lots of different pairs. I realise it's an emotive subject; the reactions I got when I first wore my VFFs out with my hiking club - "there's no ankle support?! What if you twist your ankle?!", "What about treading on stones?!" etc - are probably a taster of what's to come when I join a running club with the "wrong" shoes, LOL.

I wouldn't say $120, but perhaps $200. Of course it's a "mass-produced" item! What do you think running shoes are - handcrafted by shoe fairies? The bike is unlikely to be produced in Taiwan nowadays. These inexpensive bikes work perfectly well for their intended purpose - I have a couple of cruisers that are still going strong after several years. Go flip your bike upside down and look for the "made in" label. I bet it says Taiwan.

My assumption is that running shoes are vastly overpriced relative to their manufacturing costs. That should represent an opportunity for a company to step in & undercut the competition by a considerable margin.

Where do you think those bikes are manufactured, if not Taiwan? Hand made in America for $200? Not even close. You can get a bike hand made in America but try $2000 just for the frame alone.

Make sure to compare apples to apples. Just like you mentioned, each product has its intended purpose. The cruiser is for going to the coffee shop but you wouldn't race a criterium or tackle Moab with it. Your cruiser is like the running shoe you can buy from the grocery store. The $200 running shoe is like the bike that a local bike shop has displayed at the end of the aisle with a spotlight on it (with the fat price tag) that's going to appeal to enthusiasts.

ALL products are priced higher than their manufacturing cost. You're paying for more than the bulk materials. You're paying for every person and business involved in getting the product from the factory to the shelf.

1) Cheap bikes certainly aren't made in the US anymore, but I doubt they are made in Taiwan either. China more like.

2) "Lol @ at comparing a $200 bike to the top-of-the-line running shoes." There is no significance to the phrase "top-of-the-line" in & of itself. A $200 bike still costs a lot more than a "top-of-the-line" cappuccino. What is significant is what goes into the materials, production & distribution of the product.

3) A bike (or an inline skate) has got a lot more "stuff" in it than a running shoe: frame, welding, paint, chain, sprockets, handlebars, saddle etc. As it is much larger & heavier than a running shoe, it also requires higher costs in transportation & distribution.

4) Running shoes, cheaper bikes, inline skates - they are ALL MASS-PRODUCED. A high-end bike is not mass-produced in the same way. It is involves more specialized materials & labour & therefore costs a lot more. I expect things that are hand-built to cost exponentially more. I highly doubt that the material cost & manufacturing costs of a high-end running shoe differ by more than $5 - $10 compared to a lower-end running shoe.

5) "And yes, we buy over-engineered running shoes at insane prices, but so do you with your "high-end" cheapass Chinese skates that cost $25 to manufacture; the only difference is you buy into the hype advertised about your skates but think running shoes are just carbon rubber and nylon mesh because you don't know much about shoes."

It's not about the over-engineering, it's about the over-pricing. I'm not sure what your point is about "cheapass Chinese skates". I certainly had no interest in buying expensive skates.As I found when I went to purchase a pair - there is a pretty obvious difference in the material quality of a $100 Chinese skate & a $200 one (actually the ones I bought appear to have been made in Thailand).

5) "Also, you can't just manufacture awesome running shoes and sell them for half the price of competitors and be the new king. That takes hundreds of thousands of dollars to millions of dollars in advertising to overtake Asics, NB, Nike, et al. Where does all that money come from? Shoe sales." And that IS the point: it's not about the cost of production, it's about the marketing ( &I'm pretty sure we are talking about (at least) hundreds of millions of dollars in advertising, not hundreds of thousands). So why bring up these other irrelevant points?

hehe well for me I haven't ran more then 17 mile weeks ion a long time it is hard for me to stay focused I haven't ran in any type of race since the mid 90s when I ran a 24 hour relay with two other people which almost killed me hehe.

I don't run races for one big reason I really don't like crowds I find it hard to run around the lake part that I do because of the crowds of walkers that take up the path it throws me off . I have been running in really cheap walking shoes ( big mistake becasue they are leather ) for the past year the yare great when it is cold and or icey or snow also they were cheap and well cushioned but I am starting to really notice the heat so these shoes just won't cut it any more.

yesterday I just for a joke I ran ( literally) up to the local large thrift store and was surprised to actually find used tech shirts I looked at the label one is a Aviva ( not sure who that company is but they are Canadian made but it was cheap 2.99 problem is with both these tech shirts I can't tell which is the inside.

I am going to go for a run around the area to see if I can find some sporting stores so that I can find some running shoes . all of my life I have had problems with getting clothing and especially shoes that actually fit me properly

I think running is very inexpensive sport, it all depend on the type of shoes you are buying. Sometime you can pick up a deal at running expos. As far as tech shirts go most races are giving them out now as part of the goodie bag

Well, I would have to admit that running CAN be expensive in some ways, although I still think it isn't necessarily near as costly as other recreational activities and sports. (I used to ski. VERY pricey when you have to travel to slopes).

What IS pricey I think, are some of the post-beginner accessories. I've begun looking into heart-rate training. I'm one of those folks who research a lot before I buy, so don't expect me posting graphs any time soon! But I have some sticker-shock at the jump between the entry-level $100 gps watches, which i don't really think I'd find more useful than my smartphone with apps, and the Garmins that have interval training and HRM options. Sometimes it sure hurts to be retired!

I have time to save up for what I choose, and I need to do some non-gear-related work on my running before deciding, anyway. NOT having a HRM won't be keeping me from running!

1) Cheap bikes certainly aren't made in the US anymore, but I doubt they are made in Taiwan either. China more like.

2) "Lol @ at comparing a $200 bike to the top-of-the-line running shoes." There is no significance to the phrase "top-of-the-line" in & of itself. A $200 bike still costs a lot more than a "top-of-the-line" cappuccino. What is significant is what goes into the materials, production & distribution of the product.

3) A bike (or an inline skate) has got a lot more "stuff" in it than a running shoe: frame, welding, paint, chain, sprockets, handlebars, saddle etc. As it is much larger & heavier than a running shoe, it also requires higher costs in transportation & distribution.

4) Running shoes, cheaper bikes, inline skates - they are ALL MASS-PRODUCED. A high-end bike is not mass-produced in the same way. It is involves more specialized materials & labour & therefore costs a lot more. I expect things that are hand-built to cost exponentially more. I highly doubt that the material cost & manufacturing costs of a high-end running shoe differ by more than $5 - $10 compared to a lower-end running shoe.

5) "And yes, we buy over-engineered running shoes at insane prices, but so do you with your "high-end" cheapass Chinese skates that cost $25 to manufacture; the only difference is you buy into the hype advertised about your skates but think running shoes are just carbon rubber and nylon mesh because you don't know much about shoes."

It's not about the over-engineering, it's about the over-pricing. I'm not sure what your point is about "cheapass Chinese skates". I certainly had no interest in buying expensive skates.As I found when I went to purchase a pair - there is a pretty obvious difference in the material quality of a $100 Chinese skate & a $200 one (actually the ones I bought appear to have been made in Thailand).

5) "Also, you can't just manufacture awesome running shoes and sell them for half the price of competitors and be the new king. That takes hundreds of thousands of dollars to millions of dollars in advertising to overtake Asics, NB, Nike, et al. Where does all that money come from? Shoe sales." And that IS the point: it's not about the cost of production, it's about the marketing ( &I'm pretty sure we are talking about (at least) hundreds of millions of dollars in advertising, not hundreds of thousands). So why bring up these other irrelevant points?

You seem to miss the point on everything. You are comparing greatly different items, dollar for dollar, which makes no sense. You seem to think millions in advertising has nothing to do with the fact that most everyone wears shoes but not everyone wears inline skates. How many people who work on their feet have you seen wearing running shoes who appear to not be runners?

And yes, I bring up your skates because you seemed to think there's a lot more going into that pair; there's not. And yes, the same differences you found in those $200 skates compared to the $100 ones, can be seen with a $150 running shoe vs a $75 running shoe. If you can't spot the differences, then it's because you're a beginning runner who hasn't put in tons of miles.

Your bike comparison again shows you don't know much about running shoes, or bikes. "A frame, welding, paint, sprockets..." Those are the key components to a bike; what about the physics surrounding supination/pronation and how to lighten a shoe without affecting its control and impact of the foot?

Hand made in America for $200? Not even close. You can get a bike hand made in America but try $2000 just for the frame alone.

My bike was hand-made and I chose the frame details and the components. It was $350. But that was 1976. It was Trek and their pitch at the time was a combo of high-tech and hand-made. You could spend a thousand dollars if you wanted to, but for 300 bucks you could get a top-of-the-line frame and okay components.

Not sure why we're haggling about the details of bike and skate prices, but it did surprise me when I started running that you could spend lots of money on it. Seemed like a hobby that should be almost free.

For running, I spend a fraction of what we spend on kids sports. By shopping online, you can generally get shoes for half of retail price - I've never spent more than $70 on a pair of shoes. I splurged and spent ten bucks on tech shirts from Target, but for 20 years I ran in whatever t-shirts I happened to have. I get basketball shorts and compression shorts for ten bucks each from Target or Eastbay. And those shirts and shorts last forever, once you have a couple you never need to buy running clothes again. A pair of socks costs less than a burrito and lasts for years.

So pretty much shoes are the only running costs. Races are expensive but there's no law saying you have to race. I've run a number of trail races that were free and they gave you food.

Pretty cheap hobby if resist the urge to buy all the latest "necessities" that didn't exist a few years ago.

You may also find that if you ease into it you don't get hit so hard. I'm a fat guy and I prefer 2 in 1 shorts (compression shorts underneath normal shorts) because they make me chafe less. Downside - they can be expensive. As a result I bought several pairs over the course of a few months. Dropping $40-50 on shorts here or there that should last a few years is easier to swallow then one $200 purchase of gear.

Also, I was a big advocate of shopping Amazon for shirts, and finding that some colors were substantially cheaper than others. I know I look pretty stupid when I run, having a blue or yellow shirt doesn't matter a whole lot to me.

And +1 to the whole "damn near every other sport is more expensive" crowd. I used to be a golf professional so I got pretty great discounts from manufacturers - they figured if I was playing their clubs the members of our club would be more likely to purchase them. Anyway, I still spent the better part of $2k on my clubs, but that's just the beginning. Sure races can be pricey, but greens fees costs more - and golf's one of the few sports that costs money just to practice. Imagine having to spend $10 just take a 30 minute jaunt around your neighborhood, or dropping $150 on a race - keeping in mind you typically race five or six times each month. Suddenly the ~$100 entry fee for the marathon that I'm spending the next 6 months training for doesn't seem expensive at all.

And yeah, all of that is a drop in the bucket if you compare it to someone who's into car racing. And car racing is nothing compared to yacht racing. And yacht racing is cheap compared to guys who race Victoria's Secret models. They're the unluckiest of all.

You may also find that if you ease into it you don't get hit so hard. I'm a fat guy and I prefer 2 in 1 shorts (compression shorts underneath normal shorts) because they make me chafe less. Downside - they can be expensive.

You may also find that if you ease into it you don't get hit so hard. I'm a fat guy and I prefer 2 in 1 shorts (compression shorts underneath normal shorts) because they make me chafe less. Downside - they can be expensive.

LMAO! Yes, those Chinese-made mass-produced bikes are MUCH higher quality than those mass-produced bikes from Taiwan. I guess you showed me! Hooooo!

LMAO? What, are you 12?

I'm not trying to show you anything. Taiwan or China - it's entirely irrelevant to the discussion. Merely an aside pointing out that Taiwan was replaced long ago by (mainland) China as a source for cheap manufactured goods.

I'm not trying to show you anything. Taiwan or China - it's entirely irrelevant to the discussion. Merely an aside pointing out that Taiwan was replaced long ago by (mainland) China as a source for cheap manufactured goods.

My bike was hand-made and I chose the frame details and the components. It was $350. But that was 1976. It was Trek and their pitch at the time was a combo of high-tech and hand-made. You could spend a thousand dollars if you wanted to, but for 300 bucks you could get a top-of-the-line frame and okay components.

Those were the days, right? Back then my running shoes cost $20 and gas was $0.50 per gallon. We bought a new car for $2500!

Not to keep the inline skate vs running shoe debate going, but I think (hope) Airtime's point was this: A "top of the line" running shoe costs $175. A "top of the line" pair of skates costs the same. Both are going to be mass produced in some foreign country so wages aren't a factor. The inline skate clearly has more components (frame, boot, shell, bearings, wheels, axles, spacers, spine, etc. and K2 doesn't skimp in any of these areas. The skates I run are basically snowboard boots with a skate built around them. They're awesome, not "cheap Chinese skates" by any means.) than a running shoe. In theory all of these bits would cost more to purchase and assemble than the shoe's parts, and the skate is built to be refurbished.

You can cheaply replace every part on a pair of skates when that part wears out meaning that one pair of skates can potentially last for years and years. When your shoes sole wears out, time to buy a new pair. You can't just replace the sole for $30. I understand this logic.

That being said, you can still buy last year's pair of skates/shoes for a huge discount so I'm happy either way. Like I mentioned in a prior post, the Guide 5s that I bought last month were half the price of the same shoe last year. Likewise, I bought the K2 Transfers when they first came out for $180. Two years later I bought a second pair at Big 5 for $50.

If you want the best of the best the moment it comes out, you're going to get reamed. Have a little patience and you can have it for pennies on the dollar. And for the record, running has thus far been cheaper for me than skating. Also far, FAR fewer injuries.

Tech shirts are given at most races and included in the registration price. Other gear can usually be found at deep discounts. Going into the Nike, Adidas, etc. flagship stores is not the way to find good deals. I like Kohl's - they have permanent discounts on a few major brands (Nike, Adidas, Fila) and some other gear. If you have extra coupons or Kohl's cash, the discounts are even deeper. (No, I am not an employee of Kohl's and don't even live in the US.)

JCPenney often sells sports gear at 20-30% off. Buy stuff off-season - summer running duds as stores are rotating their stock to put winter clothes on display and vice versa. If you find a brand and model that works for you, try ordering it online. Do people ever give you Amazon gift cards? Use them. Big sporting goods stores like SportMart and Sporting Authority always have clearance racks out. They carry lots of brands, so something's always on sale. Also, be thankful that you don't have to shell out for good-quality sports bras ;-)

Shoes are a necessary expense, but fit is what counts, not brand. And even that cost keeps running far less expensive than joining a gym.

hehe well I have a really hard time finding shoes that fit so the internet isn't an option .

what should I look for in shirts and or shorts, I haven't ran in shorts ...ever

Honestly, as a large-footed female, buying shoes online has been a joy. The selection is far more diverse than trying to walk into a bricks-and-mortar. If I walk into a store, my first statement is "what do you carry in a size 11 (or, running shoe 12)." It narrows things considerably. At least it make shopping for shoes efficient. Online shopping for shoes has been a breath of fresh air.

Most online retailers mentioned here have excellent return policies.

__________

When it comes to running, you make the rules. If you're not having fun, change the rules.

I've spent more on race entries than running and biking combined. It's really getting out of hand for those who like to race on the weekends. I'm starting to choose more favorite races, and much fewer than I used to, and blowing off many of the $35 fundraiser 5K's. Organizers have gotten way too greedy. The "early registration" crap has also gone way to far, with cut-off dates and raising the entry fees to insane amounts on race day. I miss the days when you could sign up on race day for $5, run both races for $10, and for $15 you could run both races and get a T-shirt. Once or twice a year we would run a "big" race like the local Marathon for $20. Last moth I found myself with a free weekend, and thought about doing a half marathon I saw advertised. Entry fee was $50, but I missed both cut-off dates, and race day registration was $85. Yeah right, keep your freeking tech shirts, gu, sports drinks and port-potty lines... I went out for a long run on my favorite bike path instead, and the water was free.

$100-$150 on a pair of shoes that last 500 miles is not expensive. I alternate 2 pairs of shoes every 6-7 months. Shoot, beginning running is CHEAP. Wait until you get more serious.

Also why are you buying $50 tech shirts? You can get nice ones for $20 or less if you buy them at Wal-Mart or Target. Also run more races and you'll get more tech shirts. All mine I've gotten from previous races. Then I have one I got for $8 at Target on sale.

Running CAN be expensive, but only if you make it. A beginner is not going to need super high quality and expensive gear. When you start taking running far more seriously and you are running long and often, then you need to be more concerned about getting high quality gear. Especially if you are a trail runner.

If running in a rain jacket makes you too hot, run without it. I'd rather be soaking wet and cool than dry and really hot. If you don't want to spend a lot of money on rain gear... don't run in the rain.

Almost everything you are going to buy but the shoes is going to last a very long time.

I'm a believer in buying good quality gear. If you are running in conditions that require special gear, go out and buy the good quality special gear. Like the $50 tech shirts. Just only buy two and wash and/or rinse between uses.

It really isn't THAT expensive when you can use things for a very long time.

Running is pretty much the cheapest sport.

I'm a bow hunter, don't get me started on how many thousands that can cost per year. Especially if you want a new bow.

Yeah right, keep your freeking tech shirts, gu, sports drinks and port-potty lines... I went out for a long run on my favorite bike path instead, and the water was free.

Now we're talking. People keep asking me if I'm going to sign up for this local run or that local run. Why, so I can run on the trails like I do several days each week but this time for $50 and in a crowd of 1000 people? Thanks, I'll pass. A solo foray into Designated Wilderness is far more rewarding -- and costs virtually nothing.

Not to keep the inline skate vs running shoe debate going, but I think (hope) Airtime's point was this: A "top of the line" running shoe costs $175. A "top of the line" pair of skates costs the same. Both are going to be mass produced in some foreign country so wages aren't a factor. The inline skate clearly has more components (frame, boot, shell, bearings, wheels, axles, spacers, spine, etc. and K2 doesn't skimp in any of these areas.

Yes, that is exactly my point. You'd have to be delusional to think that a decent pair of running shoes & a corresponding level of inline skates cost the same to manufacture. The skates I ended up buying are K2 Power 90's - an upper-level recreational skate (made in Thailand). Usual list is around $250. I paid $224, but they can be had, on sale, for as little as $179.

But here's the interesting part that I have discovered through a little research. My wife bought Nike Vomero's at a well-known Canadian sports store & paid $175 (plus tax) for them. The same shoe - the 2013 model - costs $130 (undiscounted) in the US. But what my wife got was actually the 2012 model, which is currently available for $75 at a leading US running specialty store. That same running specialty store sells the 2012 Vomero for $160 in Canada & $175 for the 2013 model.

So, the Canadian consumer is paying 35% more for the 2013 model & a whopping 110% more for the 2012 model. That pretty much answers my initial question:

A good quality running shoe, in the US, lists at about half the price of an equivalent quality inline skate. Last years model lists for almost half the price & probably represents a more realistic mark-up, compared to the "fashion-level" mark-up on a current model shoe.

Canadian consumers are getting shafted on running shoe prices, but (for reasons I can't explain) appear to be paying about the same prices as US consumers for inline skates, which is why the price of running shoes seemed so extreme to me.

Absolutely there is....I always get the sale shoes at Sports Authority for $59...and the alt places suggested Target/TJ Maxx etc have awesome shorts/tees. I bought my Goretex jacket years ago for $99 at the end of the season, and Goretex pants for $49 same deal. It's a matter of shop shop shopping!

Why are we going all investigative reporter? Supply and demand is not exactly a new concept. If the demand is such that they simply can't charge more than the cost to make it (plus other overhead) then they just stop making it. The end. Otherwise they are going to charge as much as the particular market will support. As you've seen, those prices will be different depending on the market.

Yes, that is exactly my point. You'd have to be delusional to think that a decent pair of running shoes & a corresponding level of inline skates cost the same to manufacture. The skates I ended up buying are K2 Power 90's - an upper-level recreational skate (made in Thailand). Usual list is around $250. I paid $224, but they can be had, on sale, for as little as $179.

Thailand is the new China. Today, it's cheaper to manufacture in Thailand or Malaysia than in China, so I hope your point is that Thai workers, despite their lower wages build better than Chinese workers, because your Thai skates just lined the US corporation you bought them from more profit than had they been manufactured in China.

Anyway, I think the point is that there are more engineering costs behind a pair of $150 running shoes than $150 inline skates due to the higher impact nature of the sport. Making a shoe just 30 grams lighter without any sacrifice in biomechanical performance or fit requires people with Ph.D.'s in biomedical engineering and requisite field study costs. It's not that the physical properties of the shoe are more expensive than that of the skates; it's the science behind the shoe that costs more.

Again: I have NO POINT concerning whether the products are made in China, Thailand, Malaysia, Vietnam, Bangladesh or any other Asian country with very low labour costs. My only comment was that they are not likely to be built in Taiwan, which now has much higher labour costs & manufactures relatively high value-added products.

It's true that there is ongoing R & D going into running shoes, but equally, there is, presumably, ongoing R & D going into inline skates, which while they do not have to deal with the "impact" issues, have all kinds of other engineering issues to address. Suffice it to say, that while running shoes are much more highly engineered than they were 20 years ago, the same is certainly true of inline skates.

Again: I have NO POINT concerning whether the products are made in China, Thailand, Malaysia, Vietnam, Bangladesh or any other Asian country with very low labour costs. My only comment was that they are not likely to be built in Taiwan, which now has much higher labour costs & manufactures relatively high value-added products.

It's true that there is ongoing R & D going into running shoes, but equally, there is, presumably, ongoing R & D going into inline skates, which while they do not have to deal with the "impact" issues, have all kinds of other engineering issues to address. Suffice it to say, that while running shoes are much more highly engineered than they were 20 years ago, the same is certainly true of inline skates.

If you have no point about where your products are made, stop telling us your skates are from Thailand.

Why did you put impact in quotes? Do you even run, or is it just your wife? Go for a 20 mile run and tell us if you think shoe impact is very important or not.

Of course I agree there is continual R&D behind skates, but my point was I don't think it's as costly as that of running. Anyway, you are free to run in $10 And1 shoes from Walmart.

If you can't find affordable running gear through the internet, you're not really trying. Or else you should consider finding a better job.

It costs me about $100 a month. While I have no financial hardships, running costs more than my cell phone, internet, cable and many other things. Like anything else though, if money is tight, you have to prioritize the importance of your bills and make sacrifices.

Most of my running clothes come from thrift shops or online auctions, and the rest are used hand-me-downs from friends. I see it as a form of recycling; I don't like to buy brand-new running shirts when so many unwanted race shirts are out there. Plus, old race shirts have fun artwork on them!

My bike was hand-made and I chose the frame details and the components. It was $350. But that was 1976.

And that would be $1,447.93 in 2013

Running is cheap unless you swim in the ocean 365, then swimming is cheap. As for bikes you certainly get what you pay for, to a point; Difference between $100 and $800 is significant, especially in moist climates. Difference between $800 and, lets say, $2000 not so much. I've had mountain bike type of bikes that have rusted through in few years. I have Specialized carbon Epic from 1992 that still looks like it just came out of factory floor. Yes, the Epic was babied a fair amount more. In return, I commute 3 days a week and in gas savings, compared to my motorcycle, the bike has paid itself back in about 18 months. In reality it never happens, because I like toys